Re: Qhull include files

[Brad Barber]

At 01:59 PM 1/31/2012, Rik wrote:
> On 01/30/2012 09:09 PM, Tatsuro
> MATSUOKA wrote:
> > Hello
> >
> > One thing I have to tell that directories of the header files of the
> qhull 2012 are 'libqhull' and 'libqhullcpp' in the include
> directory.
> >
> > However, the octave assume that header files in the 'qhull'.
> >
> > I have copied libqhull to qhull in the build
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Tatsuro
> 1/31/12
>
> The Qhull include files have drifted around in the file system which is
> why it is necessary when using Qhull2012 to either specify
> '--with-qhull-includedir=DIR' or rename the libqhull directory to qhull
> so that the build system can find them.
>
>  From configure.ac, Octave is checking for Qhull in 4 places
> [qhull/libqhull.h libqhull.h qhull/qhull.h qhull.h].
>
> --- configure.ac ---
>
> OCTAVE_CHECK_LIBRARY(qhull, QHull,
> Â  [Qhull library not found -- this will result in loss of
> functionality of some geometry functions.],
> Â  [qhull/libqhull.h libqhull.h qhull/qhull.h qhull.h], [qh_qhull],
> [], [],
>
> --- configure.ac ---
>
> The resulting include file is similarly convoluted.
>
> --- oct-qhull.h ---
>
> #if defined (HAVE_QHULL_LIBQHULL_H) || defined (HAVE_QHULL_QHULL_H)
> # if defined (HAVE_QHULL_LIBQHULL_H)
> #Â  include <qhull/libqhull.h>
> # else
> #Â  include <qhull/qhull.h>
> # endif
> # include <qhull/qset.h>
> # include <qhull/geom.h>
> # include <qhull/poly.h>
> # include <qhull/io.h>
> #elif defined (HAVE_LIBQHULL_H) || defined (HAVE_QHULL_H)
> # if defined (HAVE_LIBQHULL_H)
> #Â  include <libqhull.h>
> # else
> #Â  include <qhull.h>
> # endif
> # include <qset.h>
> # include <geom.h>
> # include <poly.h>
> # include <io.h>
> #endif
>
> --- oct-qhull.h ---
>
> Qhull2012, using the cmake build and install instructions in the README,
> installed the required header file in
> /usr/local/libqhull/libqhull.h.
>
> One option for Octave would be to add a fifth location
> [libqhull/libqhull.h] to configure.ac.  In addition oct-qhull.h
> would then need a third #elif branch to locate the necessary config
> files.
>
> However, I have a question about how downstream package maintainers
> intend to treat Qhull.  They may decide to override the source
> code's default install location and put the files in one of the existing
> directories.  If they do that then a build on an ordinary system
> will be fine.  I have CC'ed Jordi, who has experience with Debian
> packaging, and Jussi, who has experience with Fedora packging, to get
> their opinion on how the source code default paths and the distribution's
> default paths interact and what the likely location of a Qhull2012
> package would be.
>
> --Rik

The qhull source tree was reorganized for 2011.1 to support multiple
build systems  and the C++ interface.  I was following Qt
convention.  They split up the headers into modules.

In the code, there's multiple references to libqhull/*.h, especially from
the C++ code to the C code.  This helps distinguish between C and
C++ headers.
     #include "libqhull/qhull_a.h"

The 'install' destination for include files was changed to reflect this
organization.    It could be changed, at the cost of
increasing the search paths for include files in the code.

What is your preference?    If the qhull build can not use
the installed 'include' directory, is that OK?

.../include/qhull/...  with C and C++ headers mixed
together

or
.../include/qhull/libqhullcpp/... for C++ headers
.../include/qhull/... with everything else

or
.../include/qhullcpp/...  with C++ headers mixed together
.../include/qhull/...       with
everythingelse

or as is currently done:
.../include/qhull/libqhull/...
.../include/qhull/libqhullcpp/...
.../include/qhull/road/...

Can Octave simply upgrade to the current version?  Users should not
be using qhull 2003.1 and 2009.1, especially as they move to 64-bit and
larger memories.

        

        

        

        

--Brad